Rebecca Ramstrom, former legal clerk, asks court to give her two years to save for legal appeal

A former legal clerk who lost a sexual harassment claim against a magistrate has asked the South Australian Supreme Court to put her appeal on hold for two years to give her more time to save up to meet legal costs.

The Equal Opportunity Tribunal dismissed a sexual harassment claim last December made by former court clerk Rebecca Ramstrom.

She had alleged she faced inappropriate comments and behaviour from now-retired magistrate Joseph Baldino.

The tribunal found that while Mr Baldino made some admissions, in each instance the conduct he admitted to did not constitute sexual harassment under state legislation.

It also found there were issues which caused its members to doubt Ms Ramstrom's credibility and ruled she had not made out her claim.

Ms Ramstrom is appealing against the tribunal decision but the Supreme Court has ordered she pay $25,000 as a security to help cover Mr Baldino's costs if she loses the appeal.

She has asked the court to give her two years to save the money and says she also needs to pay her own lawyers.

Lawyer cites woman's 'depression'

Her lawyer, Tony Rossi, has told the court his client has faced depression and cannot represent herself in proceedings.

"It is not the wish of the appellant that the matter be delayed, it is something that unfortunately she finds herself in the position that she is in," he said.

Mr Baldino's lawyer Andrew Culshaw has argued a delay would disadvantage his client, who suffers from acute anxiety and feels he cannot apply to be an auxiliary magistrate while the allegations persist.

"My client is in a position where he doesn't feel comfortable pursuing other opportunities while these proceedings are hanging over his head," he told the court.

Mr Culshaw says Ms Ramstrom has not provided the court with specific details about her finances and the court has to speculate about her saving capacity.

"There's a very real question about why the appellant isn't able or is reluctant to make use of a line of credit in circumstances where the interest payments would be less than what the appellant proposes she can save," he said.